On the role of values in judgements on conflicting planning processes – prospects for agonistic planning? Basic considerations from Germany

Sabine Bongers-Römer and Christian Diller

Planning Practice & Research, 2024, vol. 39, issue 4, 665-682

Abstract: Adapting political science’s model of agonistic pluralism, literature in spatial planning reinterprets conflicts as constructive elements. The impact of stakeholders and their management of conflicting values remains uncertain. However, planning requires continual validation of its values. The article delves into the role of values in judgments on conflicting planning processes. An explorative German study reveals that courts prioritise procedural over substantive values, although they acknowledge the latter, such as environmental protection. We argue in favour of considering values in research on agonistic planning but acknowledge that the influence of courts is limited due to institutional constraints.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02697459.2024.2354120 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:cpprxx:v:39:y:2024:i:4:p:665-682

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/cppr20

DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2024.2354120

Access Statistics for this article

Planning Practice & Research is currently edited by Vincent Nadin

More articles in Planning Practice & Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().